Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    Hello -

    My new site comes off of a huge datafeed - on the index pages which link to the individual product pages, my hypertext WAS like this:

    <a href="http://mysite.com/page1.htm">Description</a>

    Now it is like this :

    <a href="http://mysite.com/page1.htm"><img src="http://mysite.com/images/description.gif"></a>

    I am assuming this will not effect the SE's ability to spider the site correct?

    Dan

  2. #2
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    303
    I see no problems with that,
    except the lost of valuable keywords that is
    I'm not sure if a file name has the same 'weight' as a keyword.

    I'm doing it

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,797
    Add what you previously used as your text description to an alt. tag for each image. That carries pretty much the same weight as a text link.

    Search Engine Positioning - 1 Design 4 Life

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    Well, it's a decision I've been trying to make - if I have a product page with 20 items on it in a grid, I don't think I want the word "description" over and over again (once per item) as it will dilute the page a bit from the keywords I am trying to target...if, instead I put "Widget description" that may be too much keyword density for the word "Widget" which is what I am trying to score highly for...

    So I decided to take out the word "description" altogether and imbed this word in an image with no alt tag, so as not to dilute things...

    Any thoughts on this?

    Danski

  5. #5
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    Interesting Idea. Like you, I find that Google rates pages with really low Body keyword content much higher than pages with too many. As long as the Title, H1 rules have been followed to optimum effect.

    If you still want your pages to validate add <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> alt="" </pre>This has no adverse affect.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    DPG -

    hmmm...pages to validate? What does that mean?

    D

  7. #7
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    HTML has specific rulesets that specify how it should be used as set out by W3C (The World Wide Web Consortium). Different browsers tend to interpret this ruleset in different ways and most are capable of dealing with many inconsistencies. However there has always been a following and it is growing that believe that more weight is given to pages that follow the rules and use correct HTML coding. THe ALT option is an inline requirement of the IMG tag. Google doesnt like it when you use too much alt text although it does adore a little so if you have many images and still need to validate you set a blank alt="" tag which doesnt take up your IMG word count and still allows the code to validate.

    You can test your pages here: http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/

    It is somewhat easier to use than the W3C one.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    DPG - thanks! I did not know that...

    ABestWeb rocks!

    Danski

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    110
    &gt;&gt; DPG - thanks! I did not know that...

    *shudder* Ugh! Comments like that give me the shivers. No disrepect Danski, but when a guy who makes some to all of his living online doesn't even know that HTML should conform to published standards, it makes me wonder what sort of code is being written out there...

    Having said that, about 3 years ago, I didn't know about it either, theres always something new to learn.

  10. #10
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Danski:
    DPG - thanks! I did not know that...

    ABestWeb rocks!

    Danski<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You are very welcome Danski Don't be disheartened by negative comments. I have been doing this for years and have gone as long as a year without checking my validation as I felt my coding was always pure. It is quite astounding to check it after some time and see my errors. It is also a great way to check for Tag exclusions you may have missed. If the list of errors seems to be overwhelming, don't worry. As someone quite rightly pointed out, (I forget where or when) Errors tend to cascade in the validation reports so as you work down from the top you fix many or the following errors with the 1st few changes you make.

    You are asking all the right questions and if you are following them through, (I feel strongly that you are) there is nothing that can stand between you and success.

    All the best with achieving your goals and enjoying the wonderful journey along the way.

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> ABestWeb rocks! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes it most certainly does. I am no expert by any measure but I have improved my abilities and my earning power immensely by participating in this forum. It also provides the warmth of friendship online which you will not find in many other places and definitely not in another place so closely tuned to the needs of our chosen following.

    [This message was edited by DPG on August 22, 2003 at 05:44 PM.]

  11. #11
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    5
    &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&lt;i&gt;Add what you previously used as your text description to an alt. tag for each image. That carries pretty much the same weight as a text link.&lt;/i&gt;

    Link text is one of the most important things you could do for Google. It doesn't carry nearly the same weight as an ALT tag.

  12. #12
    ABW Veteran Student Heyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    5,482
    I hate those stupid validators. What were they written by netscape geeks? I guess I'll have to start all over since I forgot alt tags for background images.

  13. #13
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    I am also of the belief that Alt text and Link Text are now almost treated equally.

    Things change at Google, They always have and they always will.

    I have tried certain pages with link text optimisation and some almost identical with Alt text optimisation.

    Sometimes the Link text wins, sometimes the alt text wins.

    Thus I agree with the above theory.

    With link text you also have to consider onpage or offpage optimisation. You can't have both on the same page. EG. If you add a certain word too many times in your navigation that page will lose weight for overuse of that phrase but the pages that the links point to will gain weight for that particular keyword.

  14. #14
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Heyder:
    I hate those stupid validators. What were they written by netscape geeks? I guess I'll have to start all over since I forgot alt tags for background images. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL!, My most used tool in HTML is the Trusty Search and Replace.

  15. #15
    ABW Veteran Student Heyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    5,482
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DPG:
    LOL!, My most used tool in HTML is the Trusty Search and Replace.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    me too

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    I am of the belief that the most important thing is on-page optimisation (well, it depends on how much $$ you expect to make from that specific page I guess) - but it is important not to neglect the off-page optimisation (link-text). I'd have a hard time convincing myself to have 50 links all with pretty much the same link text with my keywords in them pointing to the other pages.

    Sure the other pages benefit, but the page I am linking from will suffer big time. If it's just a site index or something, I can justify doing it...

    DPG - I appreciate your help and encouragement. I just started in Janaury, and have gotten heavy into the technical side of things (i.e. SE optimisation, datafeeds coming out of a database via ASP.NET, etc...). I am making slow headway, and things will come together I am sure. I'm just getting comfortable enough where I feel I can add to discussions on this forum. Good luck with all of your ventures as well!

    TallTroll - sorry, I gotta field that one : conforming to those standards, while more important than I realized, doesn't seem to have prevented me from earning decent money for a 6 month beginner in AM, so I do question how important it really is to be exact. I've been programming for probably close to 10 years, and I am very familiar with the standards of more than a few languages. HTML never seemed like a "real" language to me, and I never really bothered to check the "validity" of the code (I of course clean it up, make sure it works, etc...) - I figured if it looked clean, and worked, that would be enough for my visitors, and enough for the spiders. I'd bet that I am still right on that - I will however work towards making my pages conform for the most part, just in case . There is always something new to learn, this is definately true - especially with this business.

    Danski

  17. #17
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    Great post Danski! My thoughts on validation exactly! I do it if I am bored with absolutely everything else and I want a change for a while. While I feel exactly as you do about it there is still that niggling in the back of my mind... What if it does give my page just a little bit more weight. I try to keep my code straight from the beginning. Haha

    You summed up HTML in one. First the consortium wrote an ever changing rule set. Second several parties translated these rules into a language, all with slightly different interpretations.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    110
    Danski, believe me I'm not a validation Nazi (not with the number of red errors my stuff throws out), but when I break the "rules", I am usually aware of it and doing it for a reason

    But wouldn't it be nice if there was a universally adhered to standard? Then browser manufacturers could stop trying to get their products to cope with malformed HTML, and start implementing support for commands that are supposed to work....

    &gt;&gt; earning decent money for a 6 month beginner in AM, so I do question how important it really is to be exact.

    Good on ya!

    &gt;&gt; I've been programming for probably close to 10 years,

    Then doesn't it worry you in some ways that you have done as well as you have? Obviously you are familiar with programming and the process. What other language will allow you to just slap some prototype code together and run with it? You can't just fake up some C routine, with a couple of biggish syntax errors, some missing attributes and one application-fatal exception buried deep in the obscure parts, and think "Never mind, it'll do. Lets just compile it and get it going"

    Can't do it. Not possible. But because HTML is a bit more flexible, it gets abused. I guess that your stuff would be pretty good anyway, as you are used to the concepts of structuring your code etc, and a lot of the requirements for full validation are gilding the lily (need an alt attr for an &lt;img&gt;, empty or not. Why? OK, OK accessibilty, yes I know). Most of it is simple stuff, like closing a tag when its job is done. And then only closing it ONCE. And keeping your nesting straight etc, etc

  19. #19
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Honiara, Solomon Islands
    Posts
    1,085
    As an experiment several months ago I built a site with the bare minumum everything. Targeting nothing more than great layout and unadulterated speed. I dropped every tag and inline element that didnt affect appearance completly bast***ising the Rules. The only thing in the Head is the title. I stuck any js I had in my CSS file and did all my layout from there so just 1 file had to be cached once and then all elements were available to multi-page browsing visitors. I even dropped the closing /html LOL. Guess what? Its doing great in the SERPS lol.

    I will continue to follow all the rules on most other sites but will definitely build more of this type.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    189
    DPG - Very interesting! Maybe we should create our own little "standard" for this flavor of HTML - how bout "HTML 4.01 DPG-Style"?

    Troll - I have to admit I did get a bit defensive because of the lines and lines of errors in the validation of some of my pages. I was like "What the hell is this HTML crap? This is not a REAL language - it still works, what's the freaking deal here?". Turns out, with ASP.NET I am encountering a problem where the first line of my source (when you view source on a page) is a BLANK row. Can't seem to find a way to get rid of it - yet.

    So it causes everything else to not validate because everything else needs to be in the &lt;html&gt; tags...damn, I knew I was better than that!

    For the record, it's very clean and nested properly - no hack code here bro - whew...

    Take Care,

    Dan

  21. #21
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,419
    I don't pay any attention to the HTML validators at all yet I compile my c programs at warning level 4.

    Some of the crap to go thru to get a clean listing is rediculus - especially when the browser DOES correct problems for you.

    If and when the browser stops handling the "so called incorrect syntax", I'll change a few templates, re-generate my code and ka poof - no more problem. Heck I might even get intrigued and write a template parser that reads all the templates, identifies the problems and corrects them in one fail swooop.

    Now ask me agian how much time I spend on HTML validation.

    ===============================
    PeePee merchants with PooPoo policies allow our earnings to be flushed down the crapper.

    Why give parasites unlimited cookie durations and credit for sales where they divert our users and overwrite our cookies. PP merchants directly support what many consider unfair trade practices and thievery!
    ===============================

  22. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. the banner links and text links cannot be sorted properly by date
    By Vrindavan in forum Rakuten LinkShare - LS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 1st, 2008, 08:59 PM
  2. Index page: insert a title above groups of links links
    By norbert in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 31st, 2008, 08:36 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 1st, 2006, 12:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •